GSI reaffirms sovereignty as key to international order

The international system is undergoing a period of heightened instability.

The war in the Middle East, combined with broader geopolitical rivalries, has created conditions in which conflicts risk becoming protracted rather than contained.

Although diplomatic solutions remain the preferred outcome, current dynamics suggest a less favorable trajectory — one characterized by sustained confrontation and systemic disruption.

The consequences of this instability extend far beyond the immediate conflict zones.

Disruptions in energy markets, rising food and fertilizer prices, and supply chain constraints are generating global economic shocks.

These pressures are contributing to inflation, tightened financial conditions and slower economic growth, thereby increasing the likelihood of recessionary cycles.

While all countries are affected, the impact is uneven, with developing economies and vulnerable populations facing disproportionate exposure to these external shocks.

This evolving context reinforces a fundamental relationship: Peace, stability and security are essential preconditions for sustainable development. When these conditions are undermined — whether through conflict, coercion or systemic fragmentation — the prospects for long-term economic progress deteriorate significantly. Conversely, security strategies based on deterrence, unilateral action and power projection often produce counterproductive outcomes, reinforcing cycles of mistrust and instability.

It is within this environment that the Global Security Initiative proposed by President Xi Jinping can be understood as an alternative conceptual framework for international security. Introduced in 2022, the GSI reflects a broader vision of international relations grounded in the principles of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security.

The initiative is structured around six core commitments: respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity; adherence to the principles of the United Nations Charter; peaceful resolution of disputes through dialogue; recognition of the interconnected nature of both traditional and nontraditional security threats; the need to address security at both regional and global levels; and the importance of tackling the root causes of conflict through development.

Collectively, these principles represent a shift away from zero-sum geopolitics toward a model based on coexistence, mutual respect and shared responsibility, directly challenging traditional security paradigms centered on deterrence and unilateralism.

The GSI is closely linked to two complementary frameworks advanced under Xi's leadership: the Global Development Initiative and the Global Civilization Initiative. These initiatives function as interconnected pillars of a broader strategic vision that seeks to align security, economic development and cultural dialogue.

Within this framework, development is not only an economic objective, but also a mechanism for addressing structural sources of instability, including inequality, underdevelopment and institutional fragility.

Under the Global Development Initiative, China has promoted investment in infrastructure, renewable energy, digital connectivity and food security, particularly in developing regions. These efforts are intended to strengthen economic foundations and reduce vulnerability to both internal conflicts and external shocks.

Complementing this approach, the Global Civilization Initiative emphasizes intercultural dialogue and mutual respect as tools to mitigate ideological polarization and reduce the risk of conflict rooted in identity and values.

A central dimension of the GSI is the reaffirmation of sovereignty as a foundational principle of international order.

In recent decades, practices such as unilateral sanctions, military interventions and regime-change strategies have contributed to perceptions of inconsistency in the application of sovereignty. This has weakened trust in multilateral institutions and generated uncertainty among smaller states. By reasserting the primacy of sovereignty, the initiative seeks to restore predictability, legitimacy and balance within global governance structures.

For developing countries, this principle carries particular significance. It reinforces the notion that national development strategies should be determined domestically, without external coercion or conditionality. Across Asia, Africa and Latin America, there is growing demand for partnerships based on mutual benefit rather than hierarchical arrangements. In this context, the GSI positions itself as a framework for international engagement grounded in equality, respect and noninterference.

At a broader level, the initiative advances a normative argument regarding the allocation of global resources. Armed conflict continues to absorb substantial financial, technological and human capital that could otherwise be directed toward addressing shared global challenges such as poverty, public health and climate change. While the 21st century offers unprecedented technological capabilities, geopolitical fragmentation constrains their collective application. The GSI therefore proposes that peace and development should be treated as mutually reinforcing objectives rather than competing priorities.

This perspective becomes increasingly relevant in the context of rising global tensions. Economic development contributes to stability, opportunity and social cohesion, whereas prolonged conflict erodes institutional capacity and undermines long-term growth. From this standpoint, security is not solely a function of military capability, but also of economic inclusion, institutional strength and systemic resilience.

At the same time, it is important to recognize the fact that the GSI, while offering an alternative vision for global security, does not provide immediate solutions to ongoing conflicts. It also does not eliminate structural rivalries among major powers. Its primary significance lies in shaping the discourse and expanding the range of policy approaches available to the international community.

Ultimately, the global system faces a strategic choice between competing pathways. One is defined by fragmentation, rivalry and reactive security policies. The other emphasizes cooperation, institutional reform and shared development as the foundations of long-term stability.

In this sense, the central challenge is not only how to manage conflict, but also how to reduce its necessity by fostering conditions of trust, inclusion and shared prosperity.

The author is a former minister of tourism of Brazil, a distinguished professor at Tsinghua University and a professor at Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shenzhen).

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.